Memfis Posted March 13, 2018 What are some things that modern mappers do better than the old ones? How would you sell the current mapping scene to someone who was frozen in 2000? Try to avoid mentioning the obvious technical advancements. Like, of course we can afford having much more detail, we invented 3D floors, etc. But what has changed ideologically? 6 Share this post Link to post
Catpho Posted March 13, 2018 (edited) I wouldnt say that modern mapping is "better"(outside of the technical achievements), instead we have just created new ways of playing based on the old ones. Ideologically, we have gotten better at doom, at least what i think judging by the slaughtermaps(or maybe the reduced lag), the largest deviation compared to the old wads( slaughtermaps are quite the norm for final levels in today wads, different from the old ios ones). We stopped using map07 and map30 clones for way more creative levels(i totally support this).... Darn, this is tough, gotta think more and edit later :P Edited March 13, 2018 by Catpho 5 Share this post Link to post
antares031 Posted March 13, 2018 First thing first. I'll let that person play Doom 2016. Then I'll bring Sunder, SF2012, Swift Death, and Sunlust. "Yes, now we know how to place monsters better than you guys. Good luck, and have fun. :)" 10 Share this post Link to post
Catpho Posted March 13, 2018 14 minutes ago, antares031 said: First thing first. I'll let that person play Doom 2016. Then I'll bring Sunder, SF2012, Swift Death, and Sunlust. "Yes, now we know how to place monsters better than you guys. Good luck, and have fun. :)" More like better at murdering players :D I agree :P 2 Share this post Link to post
franckFRAG Posted March 13, 2018 Not really agree, when I heard "modern mappers", I think to Skillsaw, Dobu, or Obsidian, which make some creative maps, with a new gameplay (don't kill mancubus in map07!), or new puzzle maps (Maskim Xul, The Given...) that use some interesting features of Boom, or Dehacked. These are different things add new ways to play or apprehend a map. 2 Share this post Link to post
Dragonfly Posted March 13, 2018 Two things modern mappers seem to do a lot better these days in my opinion - Set-piece fights, and 'guided nonlinearity'. As a term on it's own, ''guided nonlinearity' sounds like nonsense, so let me elaborate with an example of one of my own maps which is currently unreleased which puts both set-piece encounters and 'guided nonlinearity' to use. I would use other people's maps but from my work computer I don't have a screenshot to hand and can't play through it to explain. So what I mean by 'guided nonlinearity' is a map where the player can go in any direction they want; there's more than one way to go from the start, but regardless of which way they go, the map 'guides them' to the next area. In this example I made a map where the player starts in the center 'room', and is offered three pathways they can go from the very beginning: Regardless of which way you take, you're presented with an equal difficulty challenge. Naturally the first way you go will seem the hardest due to lack of equipment, but no single direction is 'easier to start with' and they still pose a decent threat when equipped properly from a different direction. Once you 'beat' one of the 3 directions, the whole area opens up, revealing a large pathway back to the start of the map; very evidently 'guiding' the player to one of the other directions that they have yet to beat. Once the player beat's the third and final third of the map you will notice the full level has become an open plan arena, with a floor with a switch on it rises in the center of the starting area (which the player is 'guided' to again thanks to the way the level reveals itself). Once here in the center, the player will hit the switch and enjoy a tough but fair set-piece fight which makes use of large quantities of enemies placed in such a way that rewards players with good footwork. I'm seeing this kind of map-building style in numerous maps these days from all corners of the community. It feels like we have the formula for a good level a lot more 'refined' than it was in say, 2000. Interesting topic btw, I look forward to see what other mapping traits people highlight. 23 Share this post Link to post
Nine Inch Heels Posted March 13, 2018 I can't say I know much about mapping of that day and age (2000), but a lot of so called classics were something I experienced as "overrated", to employ a very ugly and unfair term. I really don't want to across as if I was talking down on the classics, but in a way I can't help it. When people talk about the best wads of all time, or what they would recommend to someone who is new to doom, it baffles me that some of the first recommendations are things like "scythe" or "hell revealed". Sure enough those were amazing at the time, and these are classics for a reason, but if I had to choose between scythe and valiant, I'd pick valiant. Or if the choice was hell revealed or SunLust, clearly I'd pick SunLust. I like the modern gameplay better. It is more creative, and requires more attention, imo. Running circles around a Baron while shotgunning it isn't gameplay, it's "can you stay awake until it's over?" I would imagine people these days are more knowledgeable about certain aspects of engine behaviour. When I look at things like Return to SaturnX, it's inspiring, even if some of the gameplay there is not my cup of tea. People seem to have gotten much better at using the "building blocks" they're given overall, and manage to create more distinct dynamics with them, which I suppose is true regardless of formats used, for that matter. I guess the same is true for how things behave and move. Ideologically though? I don't know what the "mapping paradigm" was back then, I don't even know what the paradigm is these days, I just know there are some things a bunch people will complain about when you do them, like "mandatory secrets" for example, others complain about platforming, mandatory SR40/SR50, some people's faces melt off when they see more than 10 enemies at a time at which point their brain shuts down. If all that and then some was also true back then, well, what's new as far ideology is considered, actually? 8 Share this post Link to post
Catpho Posted March 13, 2018 31 minutes ago, franckFRAG said: Not really agree, when I heard "modern mappers", I think to Skillsaw, Dobu, or Obsidian, which make some creative maps, with a new gameplay (don't kill mancubus in map07!), or new puzzle maps (Maskim Xul, The Given...) that use some interesting features of Boom, or Dehacked. These are different things add new ways to play or apprehend a map. Not agree with who exactly? 0 Share this post Link to post
Deadwing Posted March 13, 2018 (edited) Monster placement is definetly improved from the past days, regardless if we're talking about harder stuff or not. Back in these days, you would usually see levels with simple shapes, like a big square room full of cyberdemons or spider masterminds, where you would access by a hallway and kill all of them behind cover. The progression has changed a lot too. Although linear progression is still common nowdays, the levels are now much more interconnected and they do have a more consistent layout. The earlier levels had that "big adventure feel", which is somewhat similar to the level design of games from the last gen lol (before the open world trend) Also, doors were something much more common in the past, and they're gone for good reason. EDIT: Symmetry was another thing cool at that time that people doesn't like anymore. IWADs music was also much more accepted than currently too, and I'm glad custom soundtracks are more valued nowdays. While I do love the original tracks, hearing them again and again kills a lot the experience when playing a new wad. 2 Share this post Link to post
esselfortium Posted March 13, 2018 "Every room needs to be separated by a door, because rooms are supposed to have doors" and "every wall mural needs LITE5 edges, because some reason" are two trends I'm glad have dissipated over the years. 14 Share this post Link to post
Catpho Posted March 13, 2018 You liking Valkin's post sure means something huh essel ;) 1 Share this post Link to post
Grain of Salt Posted March 13, 2018 There isn't anything they don't do better, tbqh. 1 Share this post Link to post
Roofi Posted March 13, 2018 Maybe better architectures thanks to more sophisticated builders and no vanilla restrictions. 1 Share this post Link to post
Phobus Posted March 13, 2018 I think we've gotten better at killing the player in a way that they accept. Not many inescapable pits and random crushers these days, but big, obvious traps that we have to trigger to proceed are the norm. So I guess even in ports with no scripting, stuff like choreography and guiding the player are more important. Other than that, tightened balances are much more common and the addition of resources is second nature, which gives us a lot more variety. It used to be notable when a map came out that added to or replaced the stock resources, I think, whilst now it's almost an expectation. The big one for me is the shift way from the early tendency to obscure progression. It wasn't unheard of for maps to basically be mazes with false walls back in the day, but now we create open layouts with clear land marks and obvious routes so that the player can get to the action. I think the more innocent times where there were less standards and expectations led to a lot of rough end products, whilst today there's almost a rule book. There's great examples of both eras done right and I imagine we all have our favourites. I'm really enamoured with the 2001-2010 ZDoom stuff still, to be honest. 9 Share this post Link to post
Uni Posted March 13, 2018 (edited) *Pushing the engine to its limits with HOM trickery and self-referencing sectors. *Better approach generally to gameplay decisions. *Attention to details. *Better approach at creating more flowing and looping layouts. *More ambitious and larger scale concept maps. I like this sort of thread since I'm actually making a 1994-style map and I try to capture the crude and rough style that was used in that experimental time span. 3 Share this post Link to post
Cynical Posted March 13, 2018 4 hours ago, Nine Inch Heels said: Running circles around a Baron while shotgunning it isn't gameplay, it's "can you stay awake until it's over?" I would expect someone from the slaughter scene would be more honest about what wads like Hell Revealed entail tbh. 1 Share this post Link to post
Xaser Posted March 13, 2018 Not really an answer, but something interesting to consider: In 2000, Doom turned seven years old. We're now living in a time where there are mappers and modders in the community that have well over than seven years of cumulative experience and are still at it. I'd wager that makes a pretty big difference one way or another. 16 Share this post Link to post
Nine Inch Heels Posted March 13, 2018 25 minutes ago, Cynical said: I would expect someone from the slaughter scene would be more honest about what wads like Hell Revealed entail tbh. 4 hours ago, Nine Inch Heels said: When people talk about the best wads of all time, or what they would recommend to someone who is new to doom, it baffles me that some of the first recommendations are things like "scythe" or "hell revealed". Sure enough those were amazing at the time, and these are classics for a reason, but if I had to choose between scythe and valiant, I'd pick valiant. Or if the choice was hell revealed or SunLust, clearly I'd pick SunLust. I like the modern gameplay better. It is more creative, and requires more attention, imo. Running circles around a Baron while shotgunning it isn't gameplay, it's "can you stay awake until it's over?" What is unclear here? Does it sound in any way shape or form as if I thought Hell revealed was the cream of the crop? 0 Share this post Link to post
valkiriforce Posted March 13, 2018 While I agree on things like permanent death pits and other such annoyances being done away with, I can admire a map author who willingly goes against what is generally acceptable in mapping if that happens to be something they fancy, and they might want to do it for the sake of having a more hostile environment. Sunder is a great example because I really hated falling off the platforms into inescapable pits (especially given an hour or so of surviving a map) but, I respect the author for choosing to make their maps that way. I'm used to traversing high places with at least some assurance of escaping a damaging pit, but what about the ones who created this place? Are the owners of this hellhole going to be that generous? Maybe the author wanted the player to have a real sense of dread and fear of crossing these platforms and gaps? Personally I enjoy having these kinds of thoughts, and I also like taking time to appreciate what someone else's work is supposed to embody. Things like Jens Nielsen or Bob Evans' maps are definitely not popular, and I actually strongly disliked their work the first time I played it, but like some music it really just took time for me to appreciate and love the outlandish ideas that place me into a different mindset. I'm glad we do have some map authors like Dobu Gabu Maru to carry on with some puzzling creations, at least. To answer the OP more straightforward; I'm in the agreement there's certainly way more clean architecture, much more openness in layout design, great texture use even of stock textures, and lots of new resources that change the game up a bit. When it comes to map authors nowadays, I think there's a greater awareness of what is generally acceptable and a push for quality projects much like the Nova series, seeing even new map authors who are encouraged to push their own boundaries with a little help from others with experience. It's a little hard to narrow down without sounding too generic but there's a noticeable difference with mapsets that are more commonly released today, it's really hard to keep up with playing a lot of these great projects. I don't believe either generation to be flawless though, as even today I think there can be a bit of a blur between creations that share a lot of the same values, which can also happen with map authors sharing too many of the same texture themes for example. I also think some maps today are way, way bigger than some of them need to be. I remember some IWAD maps seeming really big to me back then, but after years of playing a lot of these projects I'm surprised at how small some older maps actually look now. Monster placement can be really good, but in some cases I don't always feel that I appreciate monsters as much today given how easily a number of the Doom 2 beastiary are thrown around the place, compared to some older mapsets that slowly introduce us to some new weapons and monsters. It's understandable though given the amount of Doom player experience up to this point, and it's not exactly a preference - just something that sorta feels lost to time with some possible exceptions. Ultimately though like anything else I can appreciate that we are getting as much content for Doom as we are today. It obviously depends from map author to mapset and it's a very broad topic much like art itself, but overall I do appreciate that we have so many different talented artists who get together and are willing to create maps of all sizes, in just about any genre of gameplay - probably more readily available than it ever has been before many thanks to the ease of access of programs like Doom Builder, Slade 3 etc... 20 Share this post Link to post
xvertigox Posted March 13, 2018 7 hours ago, Dragonfly said: Two things modern mappers seem to do a lot better these days in my opinion - Set-piece fights, and 'guided nonlinearity'. These are my thoughts exactly. These are the two biggest factors in what makes a map 'fun' for me. 2 Share this post Link to post
gaspe Posted March 13, 2018 What does modern means? isn't 2011 modern enough?! :P ...not even 2007?! :( Rather than being able to have more details I think that across the years the mappers have become better to make details, or give a more refined look to their levels. Set-piece fights, independently from how much they are hard, are more thought out and I think that someone stuck in the 2000's wads will encouter a bigger challenge overall. 7 hours ago, Dragonfly said: I'm seeing this kind of map-building style in numerous maps these days from all corners of the community. It feels like we have the formula for a good level a lot more 'refined' than it was in say, 2000. From I understood it offers a nice alternative to the backtracking, or it just pulls it out in another way, but otherwise guiding too much the player is boring and it's one of those things that are changed ideologically, for the bad. 3 Share this post Link to post
riderr3 Posted March 13, 2018 Making square rooms with 150 hell knights in UDMF format. 6 Share this post Link to post
Memfis Posted March 13, 2018 I think the modern era begins around 2009-2011 (Sunder, Speed of Doom, Slaughterfest, skillsaw becoming really skilled, new wave of community projects, new vanilla craze, DTWID, in-depth analysis of gameplay and layouts, etc). 10 Share this post Link to post
Spectre01 Posted March 13, 2018 One of the biggest differences is generally much better pistol start balance. A lot of the older wads, including the IWADs, play like crap from pistol start. Modern mappers tend to not do bullshit like secret SSGs and no green armour in sight. 5 Share this post Link to post
Cynical Posted March 14, 2018 7 hours ago, Nine Inch Heels said: What is unclear here? Does it sound in any way shape or form as if I thought Hell revealed was the cream of the crop? What I mean is the characterization that HR is nothing but "strafing around HKs". You of all people should know that "coming up with a route" is a mechanical task/challenge and central part of Doom play, and when it comes to routing puzzles, there's few wads out there that surpass the second half of HR. That's not even considering that there's really only a couple of "circle strafe a million HKs" maps once you get to the well-liked parts of the wad (map 13 and on), anyways. 0 Share this post Link to post
Aquanet Posted March 14, 2018 Speaking very generally, mappers have gotten better and better over the years with tailoring custom textures and an overall aesthetic for the Doom engine. BTSX, for example, or Ancient Aliens. People have found ways (like the layer/segmented wall textures you can see in Dragonfly's post) to make maps look shapely and architectural even without floors over floors. Some older mappers were still great at creating memorable spaces with a sense of place, like Iikka Keranen. 4 Share this post Link to post
Woolie Wool Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) On 3/13/2018 at 9:15 AM, Nine Inch Heels said: I can't say I know much about mapping of that day and age (2000), but a lot of so called classics were something I experienced as "overrated", to employ a very ugly and unfair term. I really don't want to across as if I was talking down on the classics, but in a way I can't help it. When people talk about the best wads of all time, or what they would recommend to someone who is new to doom, it baffles me that some of the first recommendations are things like "scythe" or "hell revealed". Sure enough those were amazing at the time, and these are classics for a reason, but if I had to choose between scythe and valiant, I'd pick valiant. Or if the choice was hell revealed or SunLust, clearly I'd pick SunLust. I like the modern gameplay better. It is more creative, and requires more attention, imo. Running circles around a Baron while shotgunning it isn't gameplay, it's "can you stay awake until it's over?" I would imagine people these days are more knowledgeable about certain aspects of engine behaviour. When I look at things like Return to SaturnX, it's inspiring, even if some of the gameplay there is not my cup of tea. People seem to have gotten much better at using the "building blocks" they're given overall, and manage to create more distinct dynamics with them, which I suppose is true regardless of formats used, for that matter. I guess the same is true for how things behave and move. Ideologically though? I don't know what the "mapping paradigm" was back then, I don't even know what the paradigm is these days, I just know there are some things a bunch people will complain about when you do them, like "mandatory secrets" for example, others complain about platforming, mandatory SR40/SR50, some people's faces melt off when they see more than 10 enemies at a time at which point their brain shuts down. If all that and then some was also true back then, well, what's new as far ideology is considered, actually? Your complete inability to see why some people might not want to play wads like Sunlust constantly baffles me. You don't seem to ever acknowledge that such wads are an extremely niche product and something like Memento Mori, Requiem, Plutonia, Scythe, or even HR has a vastly broader appeal despite their rough edges and less attractive architecture. As for modern maps, I think they do texturing a lot better than old ones, and I think esselfortium and BTSX are one of the primary drivers of "material" texturing (where the features of textures are carefully fitted to the geometry of the level, giving a better sense that the level is "built" rather than wallpapered), and it has made levels look a lot prettier than the old "add more sectors" idea of detailing ever did. I miss the weirdness of a lot of old maps at times, though. The Doom community now has a very nailed-down set of best practices that can make maps feel samey--a lot of maps could be better by being a bit worse. 0 Share this post Link to post
Nine Inch Heels Posted March 14, 2018 6 minutes ago, Woolie Wool said: Your complete inability to see why some people might not want to play wads like Sunlust constantly baffles me. You don't seem to ever acknowledge that such wads are an extremely niche product and something like Memento Mori, Requiem, Plutonia, Scythe, or even HR has a vastly broader appeal despite their rough edges and less attractive architecture. Mmhmm complete inability.... baffling... Niche... Got it. It turns out you conveniently missed: Quote if I had to choose between scythe and valiant, I'd pick valiant. Or if the choice was hell revealed or SunLust, clearly I'd pick SunLust. Please tell us more about my complete inability to understand that people don't wanna play slaughter all the time (SunLust is not a slaughterWAD according to its authors, by the way). And while you're at it, please explain why it is that I recorded more demos for Valiant (which also isn't slaughter) than I recorded for actual slaughterWADs, because that doesn't seem like something someone who only plays slaughtermaps would do. You hear that? That's the sound of your failed sniping attempt. 0 Share this post Link to post
baja blast rd. Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Woolie Wool said: Your complete inability to see why some people might not want to play wads like Sunlust constantly baffles me. You don't seem to ever acknowledge that such wads are an extremely niche product and something like Memento Mori, Requiem, Plutonia, Scythe, or even HR has a vastly broader appeal despite their rough edges and less attractive architecture. I would not classify Sunlust as 'extremely niche' -- 'niche' is the strongest one could go there, imo. In Doomworld it is every bit as popular as the rest of those wads. There are lots of active posters who are into, or at least amenable to, that sort of gameplay. So far it's #4 on this list. Memento Mori, Requiem, Plutonia, HR, and Scythe also have the advantage of being enshrined classics that have existed for years and years, so of course a lot more people will have actually played them. I also think HR is also clearly more niche than Sunlust. HR gets a lot of plays because, again, it's a longstanding classic. But compare two wads without the existing cachet -- Bell Revealed to Bunlust -- and it's clear that the latter appeals to more people in modern times on objective merits. People who like Sunlust are the hardcore crew and hardcore-amenable crew (which are quite numerous, tbh), and also people who give it a try based on visuals and design. But how many people actually play Hell Revealed for any other reason than it's a classic? The "niche" crew that is genuinely into it is actually what I'd describe as "extremely niche", from what I've seen -- it's certainly a smaller subset than those who are into Sunlust-like gameplay. Anyway, interesting thread, looking forward to reading it in its entirety when I'm in the mood for that. :) 4 Share this post Link to post